Fanning v. Schammel
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKee, J.
— Action to foreclose a street assessment lien for street work alleged to have been done under a contract for grading Montgomery Avenue in the city and county of San Francisco.
The contract required that the work should be completed within sixty days. The work was not completed within the time; and under the law the contract expired. Subsequently, however, the board of supervisors of said city and county extended the time; but it had no jurisdiction to revive and validate a dead contract. The order of extension was, therefore, unauthorized and void. (Beveridge v. Livingstone, 54 Cal. 54; Owens…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. LynchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Beveridge v. LivingstoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
- Brady v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- People v. McCuneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by15 opinions
- Brady v. BurkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Oakland Paving Co. v. Whittell Realty Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Raisch v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Brock v. LuningCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Dougherty v. CoffinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.